Eligibility of a transferred judge to deliberate and pronounce a criminal judgment after closing the hearing

The High Court of Cassation and Justice admitted the appeal in the interest of the law filed by the General Prosecutor, establishing a mandatory binding interpretation for the uniform application of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The dispute concerned a procedural irregularity regarding the composition of the judicial panel, specifically whether a judge who initiated deliberations after closing the hearing but subsequently left the court instance due to transfer, delegation, assignment, or effective promotion to a superior court was required to participate in the deliberation, drafting, and pronouncement of the final decision on the merits. The Court ruled that such a judge is not obligated to remain involved in the final judgment process, as they no longer hold the status of a judge at that specific instance at the time the judgment is rendered, basing this decisive legal interpretation on Articles 354, 357, 391–392, 395, and 405–406 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with the ruling made binding under Article 474(4).